Season 4 Administrative Decisions

Hello all and welcome to this lovely thread which will hopefully settle the inevitable controversial decisions that will happen this season in SPL.

The main procedure in a nutshell is the following: I will make the initial ruling on a decision. If one of the managers feels the decision is unfair, then he/she will PM me asking for a veto vote. I will then PM all the teams not involved in the ruling and ask for their decision, a simple "yes" "no" or "abstain"

To overturn my initial ruling, there needs to be a super majority of managers that wish to veto. As most cases will involve either 1 or 2 teams, that means to veto my ruling, there needs to be 6 "Yes" responses (out of 9 or 8 managers, respectively).

While I know the controversy will not be completely solved, I need a way to objectively decide on conflicts that happen, and I hope this system will be fair to all teams.

The system may be tweaked over time but this should be the general outline.

The Sharks had the last pick in the auction after all other teams withdrew. They had enough credits to only buy one last player. After initially buying one player, MoP came to me shortly after the sharks made their last pick and asked if he could change his pick to ShakeItUp. After thinking it over, I allowed the Sharks to change their pick based off of two reasons: 1. they were the only team left in the auction and the change in pick did not affect any other teams and 2. they approached me in a timely manner. I think 2 was key in the sense that if they came to me today and asked I definitely would not have allowed it.

The_Chaser came to me and argued that the ruling was unfair because the Sharks still made a mistake with their pick and should have to live with their mistake like all others made during the auction.

After hearing from The_Chaser, I initiated the first manager veto of the season. The results:

Because there needed to be 6 votes to overturn, the 3 "No" votes and Atticus abstaining resulted in my initial decision being upheld.

What this means: The Sharks are allowed to keep ShakeItUp; however, in future auctions I will enforce the rule that no "mistakes" can be changed, last pick or not. Let this example be the warning.

What this does NOT mean: No teams at any point during or after the auction are allowed to change their minds on a player. Doing so would change the dynamic during the auction for all other teams. There will be no "slippery slope" arguments and this is very likely to be the only exception I ever make, given the circumstances.

Noodlez has informed me that he no longer wishes to play in SPL, for either the Frogs or the Wolfpack. What this means:

Noodlez will be banned from this SPL and all future SPL. Noodlez is also under consideration for being infracted and being permanently banned from ALL tournaments on Smogon. I very clearly stated at sign-ups not to sign up if you cannot commit to playing. Let this serve as a warning.

The trade between the Frogs and the Wolfpack will be upheld. My reasoning for this, as I stated during the preseason, is to make sure players want to play for you beforehand when you trade for them. Limitless went through with the trade because Noodlez told Limitless to bid on him before the auction, but Limitless did not confirm with Noodlez after the auction was over. So again, I will say to the managers: be absolutely sure a player is committed to playing for your team.

The Tournament Staff is purchasing the rights of symphonyx64 from the Circus Maximus Tigers for his auction value (4k) and granting them a player of their choice from the remaining pool of players. The choice will be made no later than Friday, December 28, 2012 at 11:59 PM EST. The cost of the choice will be the same value of symphony's auction price (4k).

The reason symphonyx64 is being taken off the team is because he will be the new co-host of SPL. There is no precedent created for changing players following the auction unless in the case of the player becoming a host of the tournament. Otherwise, the only method for being rewarded credit is at midseason for an inactive player.

Fabbles has notified the Tournament Staff that he will be stepping down as SPL Commissioner. His reasons are private. We all appreciate his effort in running the season to date and wish him the best in his future endeavors.

It was brought to the Tournament Staff's attention that the player Warhammer for The Stark Sharks is an alternate account of the member make. After a lengthy investigation, it has been determined the claims are true. The result is consistent with our standard tournament policy: The Warhammer account will be banned. Due to the ambiguity of the rules and the situation, where the Sharks do not have any apparent ties to the formation of the alternate account, the Sharks will obtain make to be on their roster. However, the Sharks will be unable to retain the rights to make for next season due to his rule breaking.

Now that this situation has been settled, there is a new rule for team tournaments and players creating alternate accounts. Any player found to have signed up on an alternate account in a team tournament will be banned as per the usual protocol, but the team will not retain the player from the original account nor receive compensation for the loss of the player.

UPDATE: With additional information and further consideration, it has been determined that the rule should be applied to make in this case. This would make him ineligible to be a member of the Sharks roster. The Sharks would be able to sell the inactive rights of Warhammer for 3k at midseason. Moreover, make would be able to sign up on his original account to be bid on legitimately by all interested teams.

Moderator

Moderator

Poppy disconnected vs. Hugendugen. Initially, a replay was awarded; however, the policy regarding disconnections and replays was called into question and is currently undergoing revision. Based on these projected revisions, Hugendugen receives the win against Poppy.

In the future, if a player disconnects and fails to reconnect before his/her timer elapses, his/her opponent may take the win at his/her discretion, unless the player who was disconnected can prove that he/she has a win guaranteed.

Moderator

MrE and Conflict scheduled for 8 P.M. EST on Sunday, and Conflict missed his time by about 1.5 hours. MrE was, however, still online when Conflict was ready to play, and "left," though later evidence indicates that he merely went into hiding until the deadline had passed. Though missing a scheduled match time by more than an hour is grounds for an activity loss, deliberate match evasion is unscrupulous and equally unacceptable.

The BIGS were told to sub in someone or face a no contest decision; however, miscommunication resulted in them failing to post their substitute. The Sharks were unaware of their opponent, and further miscommunication resulted in them failing to substitute another player in for Conflict, who had left shortly after.

Because this miscommunication was partially the fault of the hosts, symphony and I have agreed to allow an extension to Tuesday, 11:59 PM EST. Barring extraordinary circumstances, this will be the only time in the SPL regular season that an extension will be granted.

In the future,
- If a player, late in the week, misses his or her scheduled match time by a considerable amount of time, he or she should be replaced by a substitute immediately or risk an activity loss.
- If a player attempts to take advantage of another player missing his or her scheduled match time through deliberate match evasion, he or she should be replaced by a substitute immediately or risk an activity loss.
- It is the responsibility of a team to substitute their own players through posting in the thread.
- Late substitutions may not be deemed valid by the host's discretion.

Moderator

It was recently discovered that a user, hiding under an alias, leaked windsong's team to the Smog Frogs. Reliable evidence identifies this user as mostwanted. Leaking teams is absolutely unacceptable and unsportsmanlike behavior, and the fact that mostwanted used an alias to conceal his identity to do so makes it apparent that he was aware that such behavior was malicious. He will be banned from SPL for six weeks (weeks 3 through 8, including midseason week) and be eligible to return to play during week 9. Additionally, he will be subject to additional punishment as determined by the remainder of the TDs. Anyone who commits similar offenses will be subject to the same punishment at the minimum, possibly worse depending on the severity.

Moderator

FLCL had to leave during the middle of his match with Malekith. We ruled that Malekith could either wait for FLCL to return or quit the match and replay it later. Malekith chose to wait; he ended up waiting for about 20 minutes, and FLCL did eventually return and the match was completed.

We have established a time constraint for disconnections, as stated in the following post, to prevent these situations from happening.

Moderator

SoulWind disconnected turn 4 versus King. Under the current ruling, King would have been entitled to the win; however, renewed discussion of the disconnection policy has once again thrown this rule into question. It was ultimately decided that a hardline policy on disconnections undermined the competitive principles Smogon seeks to represent: replays are necessary to cover legitimate disconnections. Furthermore, the shortened timer on PS was simply not enough time to allow SoulWind to reconnect from his disconnection.

SoulWind was substituted for ShakeItUp, and King was substituted for Scimjara. The match never got completed, and ShakeItUp gets the win via activity.

We are going to be enforcing the following rules pertaining to the timer and disconnections:

- Players who disconnect are entitled to amount of time equivalent to five minutes minus the amount of time they have used up on their timer to reconnect. If no timer has been activated, the time allotted is five minutes. If they are not given this amount of time, they are allowed a replay.

- A player must inform his opponent one turn before he presses the "Kick Inactive Player" or "Claim Victory" button on Showdown. The button may only be pressed four minutes after this announcement OR the subsequent turn after this announcement, whichever occurs first. Players who announce that they will press the button must press the button at the FIRST available window of opportunity -- you cannot announce on turn 1 and then press it on turn 3, and you cannot announce on turn 1 and not press it on turn 2.

- Comprehensive replay rules are currently under debate and will be posted once they are fully fleshed out. Until then, replays will be awarded on a case-by-case basis.

Head TD

In addition to mostwanted's 6 week SPL ban, he will be receiving a 3 month tournament ban. His tournament project mods and Community Contributor badge have also been removed.

Some may wonder why mostwanted lost all but one badge after the ruling involving his incident was made. This was not a decision made by the tournament staff, but was instead a decision mostwanted made himself. He asked to have his badges removed, with the exception of Tiering Contributor, thus explaining the disappearance of his badges.

Screenshots and logs were found that evidence that King of the Wolfpack was being forcibly ghosted by his manager, Limitless. Additional logs show that King was well aware of the consequences should he accept to be ghosted. This incident will be ruled in the same way as a similar one in SPL2: Limitless will be banned for the remainder of SPL4, and King will be suspended for the next week. A new manager for the Wolfpack will be appointed by the team soon.

Moderator

During evan and Isa's week 3 match, the server they were playing on crashed. All of Isa's team was seen, while two of evan's Pokemon were unrevealed. Given the nature of RBY as well as the fact that evan used the same team the week before, we deemed it unlikely that any team changes would occur, and a replay from the point of the crash was awarded.

After further discussion with Sharks' management regarding the issue of Warhammer, we are adding a rule that deals with removal of players from rosters:

In the future if a user gets physically removed from the team's roster (like to host the tour), the manager has the option to take 3k towards midseason pickups, or autopick from the remaining users who signed up. This is to prevent situations in which the team drops below the minimum requirement of 14 players to participate in SPL (12 tiers and 2 subs). In addition, the autopicks should have been awarded earlier and will be award immediately in the future. The team is granted a pick only from the list of people who signed up at the beginning of the season, not during midseason. The order of autopicks is decided by the order the players were banned. Finally, this rule only applies to people who get banned before the season begins.

As a result, the Stark Sharks are entitled to an autopick from the roster instead of sellback credits for the replacement of Warhammer. Furthermore, since Noodlez was removed from the Wolfpack at the beginning of the season, they are also entitled to an autopick.

Moderator

A change has been made to the timer rule regarding Pokemon Showdown!, given the recent controversies surrounding it. The timer is to be activated at the first possible opportunity the beginning of each match in accordance with the Timer Clause. Once activated, each player is automatically given 5 minutes, with ten seconds added per turn.

If neither player activates it at the beginning of the match, then the timer may be activated at any point during the match. The timer, when activated, ALWAYS starts at 5 minutes. Thus, if it is activated at a later point in the match, each player will have effectively been given more than 5 minutes to spend on their moves--the time they spent before the timer was activated and the time allotted by the 5 minute timer.

Moderator

This week, there were two situations involving scheduling conflicts and/or missed times with BW2 OU matches: MOET vs. Younii (Tigers vs. Frogs) and Fakes vs. MarceloDK (Wolfpack vs. BIGS). To resolve these situations, the teams involved switched their BW2 players around so that all match-ups would be completed. Teams can and have arranged certain match-ups prior to each week by conferring with their opponents on the order of their BW2 OU pairings; this is effectively the same thing.

Thus, the following precedent has been set: Teams may rearrange the order of their BW OU2 lineups any time after pairings have been posted in order to accommodate time differences. Both involved teams must agree upon any such rearrangement in order for it to be recognized.

Moderator

The Smog Frogs attempted to sell back Masterclass, but it faced a veto vote. In order to block the sellback from going forward, it required a 7/9 vote not in favor of the sellback. Three votes were cast in favor of the sellback; thus, no further votes are required.

Moderator

A transaction was permitted regarding the sale of advance credits between the Sharks and the Frogs. This transaction was only accepted because a) both parties agreed to it and nothing in the rules forbade it, and b) LonelyNess had two guaranteed sellbacks (Fishy and Kinneas), which I made sure to confirm with him. However, he traded Fishy before any sellbacks were finalized, and thus, the trade became contingent upon the sellback of Masterclass--which, as recent events have shown, was by no means guaranteed. Should Masterclass's sellback have been vetoed, the Frogs would be unable to pay the 3k sellback credits owed to the Sharks, which is unacceptable; one of the trades would have to be reversed, or the Frogs would have had to pay someone back with 3k of their auction credits.

Consequently, I want to make it clear that we will henceforth not recognize any trades made with advance credits; either make trades after sellbacks have been completed, or trade the players themselves.

Moderator

There have been several post-deadline credit transactions and player sign-ups, and there are currently several more appeals.

Here is a list of transactions/sign-ups that have occurred past each deadline:

Farmer Sellback - The Wolfpack appealed to sell back Farmer past the deadline for sellbacks. They were allowed to do so because there was 24 hours before the beginning of the auction and so a veto could be enacted if necessary

Go10 inclusion - Go10 was unaware that he had to sign up for midseason to be included in the auction, seeing as he had already signed up at the beginning. He appealed to be included in the auction after it had already begun. He was included in the auction after the "auction credit only" deadline only through a unanimous vote from all teams

atticus being allowed to change his bid - atticus was confused about the deadline for using only auction credits because a date had not been specified. He was rushed to make a bid, but when he learned of the actual deadline, he requested that his bid be changed to Cristal. This was allowed because I, as a host, messed up, and the change of bid would have no effect on the rest of the auction.

--

Here are a list of transactions/sign-ups that have just been appealed:

Alaka Trade - The Raiders previously sold Alaka for 3k sellback credits; however, LonelyNess now wants to reverse this sell back and trade 5.5k credits to the Raiders in order to obtain him. Purely money-wise, this is effectively the same as LN trading 2.5k credits to the Raiders right now. Since the Raiders have consented to this trade, I see no reason to disallow it.

UPDATE: A veto has been called on this trade on the basis that this unfairly affects other teams' bidding/drafting plans. Objections were also raised regarding the fact that this was a mistake, and mistakes such as these should not be reversed. Managers, please submit your votes regarding this trade within 12 hours. Standard veto rules apply.

Princess Bri Sellback - The Ruiners have petitioned to sell back Princess Bri based on the contents of this log. The managers also do not trust Bri, alleging that he gave mostwanted Valentine's team during Week 1 (for the record, mostwanted denies involvement); this act on its own warrants punishment, which would result in a ban, which would also justify a sellback. I think it only fair that I allow them to do that; however, because the auction is already underway, I will require that the managers vote before the transaction takes place (rather than voting to veto after the transaction takes place), since a potential veto vote would cause the credits to be nullified. As with other sellbacks, 7/9 teams must veto it for it to be rejected. The deadline for voting is 12 hours; any vote not cast by then will be counted as abstention.

UPDATE: The Frogs, the Raiders, the BIGS, and the Cryonicles have all approved this sellback; consequently, Bri will be sold back, and the Ruiners will gain 3k credits.

]V[ajinTupacZ - ]V[ajinTupacZ wants to be included in the auction. As I have required with Go10, a unanimous manager vote is required for him to be included. The deadline for voting is 12 hours; any vote not cast by then will be counted as abstention.

UPDATE: The Frogs have voted to deny ]V[ajin's sign-up request; consequently, he will not be allowed to be bid upon.

KidChameleon - KidChameleon wants to be included in the auction. As I have required with Go10, a unanimous manager vote is required for him to be included. The deadline for voting is 12 hours; any vote not cast by then will be counted as abstention.

UPDATE: The Tigers have voted to deny KidChameleon's sign-up request; consequently, he will not be allowed to be bid upon.

We enforce deadlines to ensure that SPL runs smoothly; however, we do not want to unnecessarily restrict or hurt teams and players if at all possible. If there are any objections to the allowances we have just made, however, please notify symph and I, and explain.